Deriving Conclusions From Non-Monotonic Cause-Effect Relations
Jorge Fandinno

TL;DR
This paper extends logic programming to derive conclusions from non-monotonic cause-effect relations, enabling formal reasoning about necessary and contributory causes, which was not previously formalized.
Contribution
It introduces a semantics for non-monotonic causal literals in logic programming, allowing formal reasoning about complex causal relations like necessity and contribution.
Findings
Extended stable model semantics for non-monotonic causal literals
Formal definitions for necessary and contributory causes
Preservation of desirable properties in the extended semantics
Abstract
We present an extension of Logic Programming (under stable models semantics) that, not only allows concluding whether a true atom is a cause of another atom, but also deriving new conclusions from these causal-effect relations. This is expressive enough to capture informal rules like "if some agent's actions have been necessary to cause an event then conclude atom ," something that, to the best of our knowledge, had not been formalised in the literature. To this aim, we start from a first attempt that proposed extending the syntax of logic programs with so-called causal literals. These causal literals are expressions that can be used in rule bodies and allow inspecting the derivation of some atom in the program with respect to some query function . Depending on how these query functions are defined, we can model different types of…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
